Riky
$MSFT
Irrelevant, the console part was passed, cloud gaming is the hold up.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
Irrelevant, the console part was passed, cloud gaming is the hold up.
Bernoulli
M2 slut
Negotiator101
Member
That doesn't say it "doesn't sell" does it? It talks about market share, come on stop with the misquoting.
EU explains Microsoft Activision deal approval - and why it disagrees with the UK's block
The boss of the European Commission has explained in detail why her agency approved Microsoft's $68.7bn Activision Bliz…www.eurogamer.net
bitbydeath
Gold Member
I didn’t speak about Xbox, I just said why they passed it, which is not irrelevant.
All companies put out BS pretending their stance is good for the industry. I don't pay too much attention to it and don't believe it's unique or particularly extreme.
There is the possibility that Boosteroid is doing it without the explicit permission of ABK similar to how Nvidia did that when they went from Beta to general release. Unfortunately we probably won't get a clear answer to this unless someone brings it up in court. Would be an interesting
Except that's not the same as EC passing cause of the consoles sales numbers, they passed it cause they accepted the cloud remedies.EU explains Microsoft Activision deal approval - and why it disagrees with the UK's block
The boss of the European Commission has explained in detail why her agency approved Microsoft's $68.7bn Activision Bliz…
If they didn't accept the remedies then the deal would have been block regardlessly.
Last edited:
bitbydeath
Gold Member
Market share = sales.
bitbydeath
Gold Member
I provided the quote for why they passed it.
It’s not my words.
Last edited:
Goalus
Member
As soon as the likes of you stop their accusations and propaganda - sure.
drganon
Member
Try looking in a mirror.
Riky
$MSFT
Negotiator101
Member
You said they said "it doesn't sell" right or wrong? I can show you your post if you want?
You aren't providing that evidence even if you clearly think you are.
Passing the deal isn't the same as believing that the console market theory of harm isn't likely or an issue.
bitbydeath
Gold Member
What do you think the EU is referring?
bitbydeath
Gold Member
Yes, that’s what they said.
Read the quote again.
Bernoulli
M2 slut
A speech spotted by Eurogamer from European Commission executive vice president Margrethe Vestager indicates that Sony's console is currently significantly outperforming Microsoft's in the region.
Vestager was discussing why the European Commission approved the Activision Blizzard deal, noting that both companies' presence in Europe wasn't high enough to warrant concern.
"The overall market share for Microsoft and Activision was generally low in Europe," she said. "It's only when you look at specific segments like shooter games that you get to above 20%.
"And for consoles, Sony sells about four times more PlayStations than Microsoft sells Xboxes. With this context, we did not think the merger raised a vertical issue."
www.ign.com
Vestager was discussing why the European Commission approved the Activision Blizzard deal, noting that both companies' presence in Europe wasn't high enough to warrant concern.
"The overall market share for Microsoft and Activision was generally low in Europe," she said. "It's only when you look at specific segments like shooter games that you get to above 20%.
"And for consoles, Sony sells about four times more PlayStations than Microsoft sells Xboxes. With this context, we did not think the merger raised a vertical issue."
European Commission Says PlayStation Sells 4 Times More Consoles Than Xbox in Europe - IGN
The European Commission, who earlier this month approved Microsoft's acquisition of Activision Blizzard, has said PlayStation sells four times more consoles than Xbox in Europe.
bitbydeath
Gold Member
It’s an article specifically about why the EU passed it, and they cite lack of market share as the reason.
Negotiator101
Member
So you're a liar, no problem.
As "a" reason, not "the" reason. If you can't parse the difference, I think I will move on.
bitbydeath
Gold Member
It’s not my quote.
Riky
$MSFT
The CMA passed it as well on that issue with Xbox having a higher market share.
The issue is the emerging cloud gaming market not console sales.
bitbydeath
Gold Member
I never said it was the only reason.
bitbydeath
Gold Member
They’re intertwined, more Xbox = more gamepass = more cloud.
Riky
$MSFT
The CMA didn't block on console sales, Cloud gaming doesn't even need a console.
Normal Gamepass doesn't even have cloud gaming, you need Gamepass Ultimate.
Last edited:
Edmund
Member
Xbox getting COD means we will get even less "proper" next gen games. COD generations a fuck ton of money for Sony every year and taking COD away means having less budget for game development.
If it's not the only reason, then it is not "lack of market share as the reason", it would be "lack of market share as a reason".
Clearly you can't parse the difference.
Last edited:
bitbydeath
Gold Member
They didn’t need too, they blocked on cloud, which is big because of Xbox.
Bernoulli
M2 slut
Both EC and CMA : we dropped consoles SLC because playstation market share was way bigger
we have concerns on Cloud because Xbox arket share is way bigger
what is diffucult to understand here?
Vestager was discussing why the European Commission approved the Activision Blizzard deal, noting that both companies' presence in Europe wasn't high enough to warrant concern.
"The overall market share for Microsoft and Activision was generally low in Europe," she said. "It's only when you look at specific segments like shooter games that you get to above 20%.
"And for consoles, Sony sells about four times more PlayStations than Microsoft sells Xboxes. With this context, we did not think the merger raised a vertical issue."
Vestager was also talking about market share in Europe, meaning the four to one figure may not represent worldwide console sales. This somewhat reflects a Eurogamer report from 2017 that said the PlayStation 4 was three times more popular than the Xbox One in Europe, according to Son
jm89
Member
That actually looks worse for microsoft. Combined with the fact they removed their games from geforce now a while back, and now they're making deals which can easily be on another service without it, i mean what kind of permission do they need from ABK,was ABK aware of it and would it be as restrictive as what microsoft is offering?
CMA was right to laugh at these deals out the building and why they are actually being done.
Last edited:
bitbydeath
Gold Member
bitbydeath
Gold Member
It’s clearly the main difference between EU and UK. Hopefully you can parse that difference.
I'm not sure why you're being so pedantic but it clearly talks about sales
"And for consoles, Sony sells about four times more PlayStations than Microsoft sells Xboxes. With this context, we did not think the merger raised a vertical issue."
Last edited:
This probably needs testing in courts and maybe legislated for. I think ABK with their current ToS could pull it from Boosteroid like they did with GFN. I don't think they should but do think they should have the ability to do so as it currently stands. I hold different companies accountable to different levels based on importance to society.
The CMA blocked the deal based on the fact that they didn't care for the remedies as they felt left cloud service provider reliant on MS. EC clearly found the remedies sufficient to overcome the issues with the cloud gaming market.
Both didn't block based on the console/pc gaming market. The market share may have been a reason for that in the EC. The CMA just said it wouldnt be likely cause of the losses that would occur.
Both/All ToH need to be dealt with to pass the deal with the relevant remedies.
Last edited:
Negotiator101
Member
And? Does it say "it doesn't sell"? It's just more overexaggerating that needs to stop. All you've done is prove my point, well done.
Riky
$MSFT
Riky , you can laugh or cry. It doesn’t change what they said.
It's what you said.
As quoted earlier you were making a distinction between the EU acceptance and the CMA block based on market console market share. That's totally irrelevant as they both passed that portion of the deal even with the higher market share of console sales in the UK.
Now both had a problem with the emerging cloud gaming market but the EU accepted the remedies and the CMA hasn't. The cloud gaming share also simply depends on PC and Mobile streaming which other platform holders have made very little effort in. It's obvious that Microsoft will have an overall high market share if they are the only ones prepared to make a huge investment, that's what Spencer was saying when he says the CMA doesn't understand the market. Google have pulled out and Amazon just seem to be playing lip service to the technology.
I believe the CMA see this as some sort of emerging TV and film scenario but in my opinion that is passive whilst the interactive element of gaming with response times makes it uncertain that cloud gaming will ever have that sort of impact that it has on TV and films.
That's one part of the irrationality of the CMA decision.
The other is the actual proportion of Gamepass Ultimate owners which are only one part of Gamepass subscribers who stream games on a regular basis, I would say with certainty the vast majority download their games on PC and Console with only people who only access the service through a mobile phone or tablet being the real market. I don't know how many people in that situation subscribe to Gamepass Ultimate, I suspect not many especially in the UK.
Therefore the calculation of market share is debatable and I expect MS to try and prove it wrong.
Last edited:
Calverz
Member
It’s cute you think all that cod profit goes back into game development.
Bernoulli
M2 slut
he didn't say all
he is right, part of that goes back into game dev
just like the profit from COD could go back to microsoft to fund games for gamepass or offset the losses if they put COD on gamepass but sold on other platforms
Last edited:
how long until they need a commerical agreement that is so expensive even nvidia passed on it?
"Since the service is now available to the public, it appears that Activision Blizzard wanted an official commercial agreement with Nvidia for the inclusion of its titles."
"Per their request, please be advised Activision Blizzard games will be removed from the service. While unfortunate, we hope to work together with Activision Blizzard to reenable these games and more in the future."
Update: Nvidia Explains Why Activision Games Aren't on GeForce Now - IGN
Activision Blizzard is pulling its games from Nvidia's streaming service, GeForce Now.
Topher
Gold Member
The CAT has sided with the CMA more than they have ruled against them.
Negotiator101
Member
And did I say different?
Topher
Gold Member
Nope. Just providing some additional context.
Thirty7ven
Banned
CMA blocked me so now CAT is my best friend. *meow*
Sleepwalker
Member
Master bruce nooo
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Boosteroid already has those games, which means whatever agreement ABK was demanding, they got it.how long until they need a commerical agreement that is so expensive even nvidia passed on it?
"Since the service is now available to the public, it appears that Activision Blizzard wanted an official commercial agreement with Nvidia for the inclusion of its titles."
"Per their request, please be advised Activision Blizzard games will be removed from the service. While unfortunate, we hope to work together with Activision Blizzard to reenable these games and more in the future."
Update: Nvidia Explains Why Activision Games Aren't on GeForce Now - IGN
Activision Blizzard is pulling its games from Nvidia's streaming service, GeForce Now.
And if Nvidia is charging $$ from their customers, it is only fair they pay whatever money ABK is asking for their games.
KungFucius
King Snowflake
But Bethesda releases 1 big RPG every 8 or 9 years and they keep those games exclusive. Why does a game that sells millions on all platforms prove they will keep CoD's annual top selling game on all platforms? It's not like they aren't allowed to leave billions on the table due to some made up duty to shareholders.
Even the CMA said this would not happen because COD sells too many copies on Sony platforms for MS to pull it. They blocked it based on the hypothetical future of cloud gaming and how MS controlling too many top titles would give them a huge advantage especially when they are the market leader in that space already. Regardless I highly doubt that much, if any money coming in from licensing deals is diverted to internal development. It's likely in a different bin internally at least until it gets time to re-evaluate strategy. I would imagine this type of money is more likely earmarked for pure profit or maybe some goes to expansion via paying other publishers for exclusives.
IFireflyl
Gold Member
ShadowkillXNA
Member
The precedent of Bethesda is solid evidence it was just PR.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
So you're saying why does a game that sells millions on multiple platform prove that they will also keep another game that sells millions on multiple platforms.
Think about what you're writing for a second here, please.
HoofHearted
Member
ShadowkillXNA
Member
The CAT has nothing whatsoever to do with EU, they're a uk entity.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked